“In the interests of certainty, the institute recommends that the law be clarified,” Professor Warner said.

Circumcision is a permanent genital modification involving at least a partial excision of the male foreskin, according to the institute.

The report said there was rarely, if ever, a medical reason for the circumcision of a newborn boy.

Yet more than 19,000 Medicare claims were lodged nationally in 2010 for circumcisions on boys under six months of age. The statistics suggest about 13 per cent of newborn Australian boys are circumcised annually.

"Non-therapeutic circumcision is performed for a variety of reasons, including socio-cultural, religious, aesthetic and prophylactic reasons," the report said.

The downsides of the procedure include significant pain and a potential reduction in sexual pleasure.

"Trauma from circumcision in childhood can also have a long lasting and significant effect on a person's mental health," the report said.

Benefits could include its cultural significance, particularly in Muslim and Jewish communities, and some reduced exposure to infectious disease.

But the report said the world's leading health policy organisations cautioned against attributing too much significance to circumcision's prophylactic effect for those who live in the developed world, stating, "No authoritative health policy maker in any jurisdiction with a frequency of relevant health conditions as low as that in Australia recommends circumcision as an individual or public health measure."

The report said the community was split over the merits of circumcising baby boys, but the institute concluded that for reasons of rational reform it should only be legal in the case of "widely and well-received" reasons.

"The law ought to condemn the waning tradition of circumcising incapable boys for secular non-ethnicity related social reasons."

A spokesman for the Attorney-General, Brian Wightman, said the state government was considering its response to the report.

15 comments

My baby boy had a circumcision 5 days ago. He was 2 and a half weeks old at the time. My husband is circumcised but that wasn't the only reason we decided to have to procedure done. On my side of the family, a few males have had to have there foreskin removed at a later age due to medical reasons. This was another reason we chose to have the procedure done. I was very worried and anxious about the procedure as no one wants to put there precious baby through any unnecessary pain! My husband went in to watch the procedure being done as I waited in a room waiting to console my baby afterwards. To my surprise, when my husband came back in with him after the procedure, he was silent, and content. My husband said he did not cry very much at all. He has cried more waiting for a feed! It has already almost healed and he didn't seem to be in any pain or distress after the prodecure. I am very happy that I chose this procedure and I would have done so even if there were no medical reasons in my family. I believe it is the parents choice and should not be banned. My husband is happy he had a circumcision and frankly, so am I! It is much cleaner and nicer and I would want that for my son. Many people have disagreed with our decision but all are people who are non circumcised parents so I feel it is not there place to comment.

Commenter

proudmummyof2

Location

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 3:41PM

It is anyone's right to comment, because whether you think it's "nicer" is not the point. What you are doing is removing a part of your child's body without their consent. Would you think it acceptable if I had my child's little finger chopped off, just because I liked the look better?

There is nothing to even argue with here, it's very simple. You do not have the right to remove part of another person's body without their consent, unless there is a clear medical necessity. If you think you do, you do not understand the concept of human rights. Or maybe, like a lot of parents, you are confused and think that your child is your property, rather than a human with rights like the rest of us, who happens to be dependent on you for the time being.

I ask again, would you think it acceptable in any other circumstance to remove part of a person's body without their consent, and without clear medical necessity. Think about it.

Every human being has the right to bodily integrity, if you like abusing your child's basic human rights, continue to feel satisfied with yourself about your decision. And hope he is lucky enough to have no lasting issues because of this (except for the fact that he's had the most sexually sensitive part of his penis removed - and given no choice in this).

Commenter

People will one day look back..

Location

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 5:42PM

I'm sorry but if your son did not cry it was likely because he was in shock. Actually a penis is perfectly designed (as are vaginas) to be self cleaning when they are whole so they are actually cleaner and less open to infections and bacteria wjhen they are NOT circumcised. Getting it done because the parents consider it "nicer" is not acceptable to many many people. If you had a girl would you get her breat implants so she looks "nicer" or more like you? It is akin to cosmetic surgery. Even just to complete the proceedure the Dr has to forcibly separate the foreskin from the glans (which are fused in infancy for as long as up to teenage years). It is similar to forcibly removing ones fingernails from the nail bed. Imagine that being done to you with no pain relef. Additional to that the penis often tries to heal itself from the trauma of the surgery by refusing creating skin bridges that cause issues later on and certainly ensuring the penis is not "nice" in appearance. People should get thoroughly educated about this topic first and foremost. And also look into the horrific complications. Savingoursons.org and Drmomma are both excellent places to start. I whole heartedly welcome the move in Tasmania as surgery without a required medical reason on a tiny tiny infant with no pain relief is barbaric and, male or female, it is genital mutilation in which the PATIENT has NO voice.

Commenter

Karen M

Location

Brisbane

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 4:24PM

As a 32 year old circumcised male, I find it completely astounding that Karen believes I have been genitally mutilated. As the owner of a penis I can assure her that I have not felt my life has been hindered by my circumcision, and I can also assure her that my sex life and satisfaction with it is just fine. No complaints. The issue for debate here is choice. As a parent she can choose whatever she likes for her child, as I will choose for my child. We live in an educated society and we do not need to have every aspect of our live decided for us by the likes of Kate Warner.

Commenter

JMeister7

Location

Sydney

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 5:27PM

Why is it your right to choose to have part of your child's body removed? Your child is a human being, not a doll, you have no more right to this than you would have to have part of my body removed without consent.

I'm glad circumcision hasn't caused issues for you, but it has for thousands and thousands of men. Like all surgery, circumcision carries a risk, it doesn't happen often, but babies do die from it. I hope the parents of the 100 or so baby boys that die each year from it in the US (http://www.mensstudies.com/content/b64n267w47m333x0/?p=cb32b9409bca45b19f15eca1a8b41d3b&pi=5) feel good about their decision to subject their infant to unnecessary surgery because it "looks nicer".

It's astounding that it would be legal to carry out non-necessary and non-consentual surgery on a child, that could risk its death. It's completely against WHO guidelines about when surgery should be performed on a child unable to give consent (i.e. only as a last resort), and completely against every human's right to bodily integrity.

Commenter

...

Location

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 6:04PM

I come from a long line of circumcised males and my boys are circumcised.Despite the dire predictions of a very vocal minority not of us have suffered any lasting mental anguish - indeed I doubt anyone that had this operation at an early age would remember the event.I oppose any push for circumcision to be legally banned as repealing these laws take longer than enacting them - certainly longer than it takes the medical profession to constantly change its mind on the benefits or otherwise of the operation.

I don't have dire predictions for kids that are circumcised, I'm sure most of them are fine. But it is a factual statement that not all of them are fine, 1 in a million will end up losing their entire penis, other complications are much more common than this, and can be long lasting. One of the more common is too much skin being removed (no way to tell how big someone's erect penis will be when they're 2 weeks old), leading to very tight and therefore painful erections, sometimes to the point of tearing skin upon erection. Sounds fun hey. And death is a possibility, as with all surgery.

Remember, we're talking about elective surgery, but not elected by the person that undergoes it.

Ignore the demographic involved for a minute, and ask yourself if you really believe it is fine to subject another human being to surgery that involves these risks, without their consent and when it's not medically necessary to do so?

It's probably not that much comfort to the people that have suffered a dramatic drop in quality of life due to having non-necessary surgery forced upon them, that you and your kids are all ok.

Have a quick read of this: http://www.cirp.org/news/perth1/ If this happens to even one boy who is forced to undergo amputation of his foreskin for no reason other than parental aesthetic preferences, how are you ok with this?

Commenter

...

Location

Date and time

August 21, 2012, 9:00PM

If you have a problem with it then don’t get your children done….Simple as that!

No one’s talking about making it a law to get you children circumcised so why should there be a law against it.

Yes children aren’t property, but as a parent you have the right and obligation to make decisions that YOU believe are in the best interest of your child.

Yes there is evidence to suggest that sometimes (rarely) there can be complications, but if you research the whole concept and not just the negatives you will find that there is also a lot of positive aspects. I.e Less risk of infections when older and less likely of passing on cervical cancer to their partner when they’re older (A disease which is much worse than a snip).

Saying that it is hurting a child and therefore not right is like saying that we shouldn’t get out children immunised as they may cry. Or that a person shouldn’t get their ears pierced until their 18 as that’s mutilated their body….Perhaps we should let their hair grow too!

Right now there are too many arguments for and against it to make a law about it. Until there is persuasive evidence one way or another the decision should be left up to the parent.

And stop accusing people of mutilating or not caring for their children if they choose to get them circumcised. No one accuses you of not caring for not getting it done!

Commenter

Ali

Location

Melbourne

Date and time

August 22, 2012, 10:13AM

The fact is, no national or international medical association in the world recommends circumcision as a matter of course, because many of the positives are not proven, and any minor positives there *may* be are outweighed by the negatives.

I'm not the only one concerned about human rights violations. Here's the Royal Australasian College of Physicians' statement in 2010, and if you did some research, you'd see this is not an unusual stance in the medical profession:

"Ethical and human rights concerns have been raised regarding elective infant male circumcision because it is recognized that the foreskin has a functional role, the operation is non-therapeutic and the infant is unable to consent. After reviewing the currently available evidence, the RACP believes that the frequency of diseases modifiable by circumcision, the level of protection offered by circumcision and the complication rates of circumcision do not warrant routine infant circumcision in Australia and New Zealand." "The foreskin has two main functions. Firstly it exists to protect the glans penis. Secondly the foreskin is a primary sensory part of the penis, containing some of the most sensitive areas of the penis." "The potential harms include contravention of individual rights, loss of choice, loss of function, procedural and psychological complications. . . . A boy circumcised as an infant may deeply resent this when he grows older; he may want what he cannot have – not to have been circumcised. . . . The option of leaving circumcision until later, when the boy is old enough to make a decision for himself does need to be raised with parents and considered. . . . this option seeks to respect the child’s physical integrity, and capacity for autonomy by leaving the options open for him to make his own autonomous choice in the future".

Commenter

...

Location

Date and time

August 22, 2012, 5:32PM

I agree with you Ali. Educating parents into making the choice that is in the best interest of their child is what it should be about. Or should we ban the piercing of childrens ears because they might cry or not get our children immunised because there is evidence to suggest that it could result in the development of autism.

It would be descriminating if banning it except for well-established religious or ethnic reasons. My husband had to be circumcised for medical reasons at the age of 4 and still remembers the pain he went through and his sex life has certainly not been hindered by it and is satisfied with his sex life albeit he would like it every day.

There are many reasons why parents choose to circumcise and it is rude and disgusting of others to push their beliefs onto others - it would be like banning women from terminating pregnancies especially after being violently raped or if the child will be completely unwanted (and therefore unloved). It is an individual choice and we do what is in the best interests of our children.

Everyone has a right to their own opinion and I can assure you we considered all the negatives and positives, and for us the positives outweighed the negatives.

Oh, and Kingsley you are wrong. Not all pierced ears return to normal if the studs are left out. You just have look at what people are doing by putting larger than normal earrings in their ears leaving permanent holes for life when removed.

Lastly, we are not circumcision nuts but believe in free choice as it is your choice to be totally against it and resentful (which means you need therapy to deal with your resentment).

Related Coverage

The ban on the circumcision of boys in many Australian public hospitals has come under fire from 12 medical experts, who say the latest international evidence shows the procedure reduces risk of infections, cancer and painful conditions.

10 Jun The Royal Australasian College of Physicians has flagged it will not change its policy against circumcision despite evidence the procedure can prevent the spread of HIV and other sexual diseases.

In spite of being in an almost constant state of motion while looking after the kids and trying to keep things together at home, it can seem as though parents have managed to get nothing on the to-do list done by the end of the day.